Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

jonty.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 89 posts

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#21

Post by pavel_lishin »

NathanKP wrote: post #8
Groxx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they're running a honey-pot machine... how do they tell? You're coming from the same IP, with the same session. At best they can fingerprint your browser, which is far from proof and easy to change. Or nab things from Flash, maybe - but people likely to use this exploit to educate are probably more likely to run Flash blockers.

While it may be unlikely for you to get caught in my mind that still doesn't make it a good idea to run Idiocy. In essence I consider it to be a form of cyber terrorism. Terrorists use illegal or unsavory acts to gain attention and draw media coverage of their cause. Essentially idiocy is just cyber terrorism. It says "Look! I can take over your account. Now that you are scared let me show you what I want you to do."…

By that definition, if I find a flaw in (as an example) the New York Times, and e-mail them explaining the flaw and how to fix it, I'm engaging in cyber terrorism.

Shit, I remember when people would throw around the words "white hat" and "black hat", instead of "terrorism".

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#22

Post by NathanKP »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #21
NathanKP wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it may be unlikely for you to get caught in my mind that still doesn't make it a good idea to run Idiocy. In essence I consider it to be a form of cyber terrorism. Terrorists use illegal or unsavory acts to gain attention and draw media coverage of their cause. Essentially idiocy is just cyber terrorism. It says "Look! I can take over your account. Now that you are scared let me show you what I want you to do."…

By that definition, if I find a flaw in (as an example) the New York Times, and e-mail them explaining the flaw and how to fix it, I'm engaging in cyber terrorism. Shit, I remember when people would throw around the words "white hat" and "black hat", instead of "terrorism".

No one gets scared when you point out a flaw in the New York Times. (Except maybe the writer who is now at risk of getting fired.) Additionally, pointing out a flaw in a newspaper is not illegal. Impersonating someone is (or can be depending on what you do while impersonating them).

Whether it is black hat or white hat wasn't my point. My point is that Idiocy aims to accomplish change by scaring people and getting media attention. That is the same thing that terrorism does, so I think the term fits.

Now whether it is possible to have "white hat" terrorism is another related argument but it doesn't invalidate by original point.

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#23

Post by Groxx »

borski wrote: post #16
Groxx wrote: post #14

A question: What does it tweet? So far I'm only seeing people tweeting about Idiocy, nothing that appears to be coming from Idiocy. Different tones / content of the message could have extremely differing responses, and as it's intentionally high profile, should be extremely careful.

From the code: status = 'I browsed twitter insecurely on a public network and all I got was this lousy tweet. http://jonty.co.uk/idiocy-what'

Unfortunately, the link it includes doesn't contain the part mentioning this capability is nothing new, merely that there's a new tool for it: http://jonty.co.uk/idiocy-what

If the creator is browsing through these: include that part, or people will associate the danger with the new tool, and nothing else.

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#24

Post by tibbon »

Anyone have ideas on getting it running on OS X?

One downside to some (often interpreted) languages is that there isn't always an easy way to package them up into a single binary for user consumption.

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#26

Post by swombat »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #21
NathanKP wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it may be unlikely for you to get caught in my mind that still doesn't make it a good idea to run Idiocy. In essence I consider it to be a form of cyber terrorism. Terrorists use illegal or unsavory acts to gain attention and draw media coverage of their cause. Essentially idiocy is just cyber terrorism. It says "Look! I can take over your account. Now that you are scared let me show you what I want you to do."…

By that definition, if I find a flaw in (as an example) the New York Times, and e-mail them explaining the flaw and how to fix it, I'm engaging in cyber terrorism. Shit, I remember when people would throw around the words "white hat" and "black hat", instead of "terrorism".

Actually, "Idiocy" is more akin to finding a flaw in the New York Times, and then using that flaw to change the headline of their front page.

I'm pretty sure that would land you in jail if caught.

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#28

Post by [deleted] »

NathanKP wrote: post #8
Groxx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they're running a honey-pot machine... how do they tell? You're coming from the same IP, with the same session. At best they can fingerprint your browser, which is far from proof and easy to change. Or nab things from Flash, maybe - but people likely to use this exploit to educate are probably more likely to run Flash blockers.

While it may be unlikely for you to get caught in my mind that still doesn't make it a good idea to run Idiocy. In essence I consider it to be a form of cyber terrorism. Terrorists use illegal or unsavory acts to gain attention and draw media coverage of their cause. Essentially idiocy is just cyber terrorism. It says "Look! I can take over your account. Now that you are scared let me show you what I want you to do."…

[deleted]

Re: Firesheep usage leads to Idiocy

#29

Post by [deleted] »

swombat wrote: post #26
pavel_lishin wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that definition, if I find a flaw in (as an example) the New York Times, and e-mail them explaining the flaw and how to fix it, I'm engaging in cyber terrorism. Shit, I remember when people would throw around the words "white hat" and "black hat", instead of "terrorism".

Actually, "Idiocy" is more akin to finding a flaw in the New York Times, and then using that flaw to change the headline of their front page. I'm pretty sure that would land you in jail if caught.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN